BostonGlobe: False pretense for war in Libya?

As I have stated previously, personally I am torn about what should be done about Libya. However this is ironic all things considered and how the Obama Administration seems to still be campaigning against the Bush Administration.

EVIDENCE IS now in that President Barack Obama grossly exaggerated the humanitarian threat to justify military action in Libya. The president claimed that intervention was necessary to prevent a “bloodbath’’ in Benghazi, Libya’s second-largest city and last rebel stronghold.

But Human Rights Watch has released data on Misurata, the next-biggest city in Libya and scene of protracted fighting, revealing that Moammar Khadafy is not deliberately massacring civilians but rather narrowly targeting the armed rebels who fight against his government.

Misurata’s population is roughly 400,000. In nearly two months of war, only 257 people — including combatants — have died there. Of the 949 wounded, only 22 — less than 3 percent — are women. If Khadafy were indiscriminately targeting civilians, women would comprise about half the casualties.

Obama insisted that prospects were grim without intervention. “If we waited one more day, Benghazi . . . could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world.’’ Thus, the president concluded, “preventing genocide’’ justified US military action.

Politicians of ANY party will lie to get their way. I believe that our country has an implicit interest in Libya although I believe it's not quite about saving lives. I have a hunch it is similar to why we supported Mubarak for all of those years, i.e. his 'allegiance' to the West rather than his own people.

With that said, our country simply doesn't need to be involved in this. The peoples of North Africa and the Middle East didn't want the French, British, Germans, Italians, and Spaniards telling them how to run their lives. Why in hell do we think they would want us to be involved as well?